logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.11 2015노4809
강제집행면탈
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 3,000,000 and by a fine of KRW 1,00,000.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the Defendants is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (the fine of KRW 5,000,000, and the fine of KRW 3,000,000) is too unreasonable.

2. The instant crime was committed with the intent to escape from compulsory execution by bearing false debt, thereby making it difficult to realize the claim of the victim drug company. In light of the contents of the Defendants’ crime and the amount of debt falsely assumed, the nature of the crime is somewhat weak.

shall not be deemed to exist.

However, it seems that Defendant A paid KRW 80,000,000 to the damaged company in the civil case concerned, and the mediation is ultimately resolved by the dispute between the Defendants and the victimized company.

In addition, the defendants have reached the judgment of the court, and they recognize and oppose their errors later.

Defendant

In the case of B, the first offense without any previous conviction, and the Defendant’s credit held against the Defendant, which led to the instant crime to be repaid, and there are some circumstances to consider the circumstance.

In addition, considering all the sentencing factors in the instant case, such as the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, degree of mutual participation in the instant crime, motive and background leading to the instant crime, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court to the Defendants is somewhat unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendants' appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed and it is decided as follows.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence against the Defendants recognized by this court is identical to the description of the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Defendants of the relevant legal provisions and the choice of punishment concerning criminal facts: Articles 327 and 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse.

arrow